Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Malingering is the fabrication, feigning, or exaggeration of physical or psychological symptoms designed to achieve a desired outcome, such as personal gain, relief from duty or work, avoiding arrest, receiving medication, or mitigating prison sentencing. It presents a complex ethical dilemma within domains of society, including healthcare ...
Binion, 132 F. App'x 89 (8th Cir. 2005), [1] is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit applied two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, United States v. Booker [2] and United States v. Fanfan, [3] in upholding the sentencing decision by the trial court, the United States District Court for the Eastern District ...
Stating that an individual is malingering can cause iatrogenic harm to patients if they are actually not exaggerating or feigning. Such iatrogenic harm may consist in delaying or denying medical attention, therapies, or insurance benefits. In the U.S. military, malingering is a court-martial offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
The case set the current standard for adjudicative competency in the United States. In Godinez v. Moran (1993) the Supreme Court enforced the Dusky standard as the Federal Standard for competence to stand trial. [7] Although the statutes addressing competency vary from state to state in the United States, the two elements outlined in the Dusky v
For the first time in decades, the California Supreme Court has taken a citizen initiative off the ballot before voters could weigh in. Justices on the state’s highest court unanimously ruled ...
Police officers cannot detain someone on the street just because that person acts furtively to avoid contact with them, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The California Supreme Court ruling curtails the ability of public employees in the state to seek help from the courts in labor disputes.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that California courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant on claims brought by plaintiffs who are not California residents and did not suffer their alleged injury in California. [1]